HAL Id: hal-02475225
https://hal.archives-ouvertes.fr/hal-02475225
Submitted on 11 Aug 2020
HAL is a multi-disciplinary open access
archive for the deposit and dissemination of
sci-entific research documents, whether they are
pub-lished or not. The documents may come from
teaching and research institutions in France or
abroad, or from public or private research centers.
L’archive ouverte pluridisciplinaire HAL, est
destinée au dépôt et à la diffusion de documents
scientifiques de niveau recherche, publiés ou non,
émanant des établissements d’enseignement et de
recherche français ou étrangers, des laboratoires
publics ou privés.
Electron Beam Brightness and Undulator Radiation
Brilliance for a Laser Plasma Acceleration Based Free
Electron Laser
Amin Ghaith, Alexandre Loulergue, Driss Oumbarek, Olivier Marcouillé,
Mathieu Valléau, Marie Labat, Sebastien Corde, Marie-Emmanuelle Couprie
To cite this version:
Amin Ghaith, Alexandre Loulergue, Driss Oumbarek, Olivier Marcouillé, Mathieu Valléau, et al..
Electron Beam Brightness and Undulator Radiation Brilliance for a Laser Plasma Acceleration Based
Free Electron Laser. Instruments, 2020, 4 (1), pp.1. �10.3390/instruments4010001�. �hal-02475225�
Article
Electron Beam Brightness and Undulator Radiation
Brilliance for a Laser Plasma Acceleration Based Free
Electron Laser
Amin Ghaith1,* , Alexandre Loulergue1, Driss Oumbarek1, Olivier Marcouillé1,
Mathieu Valléau1, Marie Labat1, Sebastien Corde2 and Marie-Emmanuelle Couprie1
1 Synchrotron Source Optimisée de Lumière d’Energie Intermédiaire du LURE (Laboratoire pour l’Utilisation du Rayonnement Electromagnétique) (Synchrotron SOLEIL), L’Orme des Merisiers, 91190 Saint-Aubin, France; alexandre.loulergue@synchrotron-soleil.fr (A.L.);
driss.oumbarek-espinos@synchrotron-soleil.fr (D.O.); olivier.marcouille@synchrotron-soleil.fr (O.M.); mathieu.valleau@synchrotron-soleil.fr (M.V.); marie.labat@synchrotron-soleil.fr (M.L.);
marie-emmanuelle.couprie@synchrotron-soleil.fr (M.-E.C.)
2 École Nationale Supérieure de Techniques Avancées Paris (ENSTA Paris), Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique (CNRS), Ecole Polytechnique, Institut Polytechnique de Paris, 91128 Palaiseau, France; sebastien.corde@polytechnique.edu
* Correspondence: amin.ghaith@synchrotron-soleil.fr
Received: 3 December 2019; Accepted: 27 December 2019; Published: 1 January 2020
Abstract: We report here on spontaneous undulator radiation and free electron laser calculations after a 10-m long transport line (COXINEL) using a Laser Plasma acceleration (LPA) source. The line enables the manipulation of the properties of the produced electron beams (energy spread, divergence, dispersion) in view of light source applications. The electron beam brightness and undulator radiation brilliance are addressed by an analytical approach enabling us to point out the influence of chromatic effects in the COXINEL case.
Keywords:laser plasma acceleration; electron beam brightness; undulator radiation; free electron laser
1. Introduction
Particle accelerators have become a crucial need for advancement in many domains such as nanotechnology, atomic physics, nuclear physics, chemistry and medicine. By accelerating particles close to the speed of light, all kinds of explorations can be done, whether it is for colliding particles to discover elementary particles or by producing an intense x-ray source from synchrotron radiation, capable of unraveling the quantum realm.
A relativistic electron traversing a periodic sinusoidal magnetic field, generated by an undulator, emits synchrotron radiation at each period [1]. Photons produced by an individual electron interfere constructively resulting in sharp spectral lines well collimated within a cone. In a Free Electron Laser (FEL), the electrons interact with the radiation, where energy is transferred between the electron beam and the radiated wave via the so-called ponderomotive force. This process results in a low gain of the electromagnetic wave, firstly introduced using a quantum approach [2] and further examined using a classical approach [3]. In the undulator magnetic field, the beam energy modulation becomes a density modulation, because electrons with smaller energies are affected more by the field, prolonging their orbit and thus leading to a micro-bunching mechanism. Thanks to this process, the electrons are put in phase along the longitudinal axis and emit coherent radiation and light intensity is amplified. Unlike conventional lasers, where the electrons are bound to the atoms in the gain medium allowing the emission at a fixed wavelength, the FEL wavelength can be varied by changing the machine parameters
such as electron beam energy or/and undulator magnetic field. The FEL has thus become a conceptual and practical alternative and has exceeded by far other lasing systems. This new laser revolution, with the advent of X-Ray FEL, opens the path for deciphering unexplored ultra-fast phenomena with unprecedented time resolution.
Conventional linear accelerators (Linacs) are often used for FEL based applications, due to their stability and efficiency and, most importantly, to the large experience gained using these accelerators over many years. However, these infrastructures are large in size, especially for operating at higher energies and are limited to tens to hundreds of MeV/m accelerating gradient by the use of RF cavities. Following the rapid progress in the development of high-intensity laser systems [4], a new accelerating concept called Laser Plasma Acceleration (LPA) was introduced [5]. In an LPA, an intense short-pulsed laser is focused into a gas medium. Due to the high electric fields, electrons are stripped and separated spatially from the heavy ions that have a negligible response in the time-scale of that of the electrons. This process creates a plasma with a disequilibrium charge distribution in the perturbed region that can be observed as a wakefield (plasma wave) following the laser. A huge gradient of∼GeV/m is created between the back of the wakefield (consisting mainly of electrons) and at its center (consisting mainly of ions), in which electrons trapped between these two regions are subjected to an extreme electric force. This allows LPA to operate with thousands of times gradients than ones in conventional accelerators, thus producing extremely compact sources of bright and energetic electrons [6–8].
Undulator radiation has already been measured using such a source [9–12] but not with the quality achieved on synchrotron radiation facilities. LPA based FEL [13] demonstration is still challenged by the electron beam quality. In this paper, the main setbacks posed by an LPA based electron beam, in the view of an FEL amplification, are reported, alongside solutions that can qualify such beams for an FEL application. Undulator radiation achieved so far with LPA beams is discussed, including the COXINEL experiment equipped with an advanced manipulation line. The paper presents combined analytic approaches for electron beam manipulation in the LPA transfer line starting from the source parameters to the ones at the undulator center, undulator radiation and FEL calculations. Emphasis is put on the electron beam brightness evolution and undulator brilliance. Finally, the FEL performance is examined for different initial electron beam parameters for the COXINEL baseline reference case. 2. Issues of LPA Based FEL
The FEL amplification efficiency highly depends on the overlapping of the electron beam and the FEL wave. Thus, there should be a proper transverse matching (size, divergence) between the electron beam and the FEL wave along the undulator for ensuring a proper interaction. Besides, the normalized emittance enshould satisfy the Pellegrini criterion [14]:
en< γλFEL
4π (1)
where γ is the relativistic factor and λFELthe operating FEL wavelength. For a typical LPA electron beam of 500 MeV and εn = 1 mm·mrad at the source, the emittance requirement is satisfied for an operating wavelength λ≥12 nm. However, unlike beam drifts in conventional accelerators where the εn scales as γεe f f (εe f f being the effective emittance), a problem arises regarding the transport, where the chromatic emittance εchromincreases quadratically with the divergence along a distance s [15–18]. Such dependence can be understood by using the general definition of the normalized emittance expressed as [19]:
ε2n= hx2ihγ2x02i − hxγx0i2, (2)
where x and x0are the position and angle of the particle with respect to the reference path, respectively andhistands for the average. Considering that there is no correlation between the energy and the transverse position, that is drift without collective effects, one finds:
ε2n= hγ2ihx2ihx02i − hγi2hxx0i2, (3)
Inserting the energy spread σγrelation:
σγ2 = hγ
2i − hγi2
hγi2
in Equation (3), one gets:
ε2n = σγ2σx2σx02+ε2e f fhγi2, (4)
where σxand σx0 are the beam size and divergence, respectively. If the chromatic emittance is negligible, the first term in Equation (4) is set to zero and one arrives to the conventional definition of the normalized emittance as εn=hγiεe f f. In the case of LPA, the generated electron beam can be considered as a point source, thus the bunch transverse size after a drift distance s becomes:
σx(s) =σx0s (5)
Inserting Equation (5) in Equation (4), one gets the expression of the emittance after a drift s in the longitudinal direction:
ε2n(s) ≈ε2n0+γσγ2σx,z04s2. (6)
For a typical LPA electron beam of 2 mrad divergence, 500 MeV energy and 1% spread, the emittance is increased by a factor of 80 just after 10 cm drift, thus the divergence should be handled at an early stage of the transport.
The second FEL requirement concerns the electron beam energy spread. A large energy spread deteriorates the micro-bunching efficiency and smears out the electron bunch [20]. Hence, the electron beam should be rather cold with relative energy spread σγsmaller than the FEL bandwidth that is
equal to the Pierce parameter ρFEL:
σγ<ρFEL, (7) where ρFEL= I 8γ3I A λuKu|J J| 2πσx 21/3 ,
where I is the electron beam current, IA = 17 kA the Alfven current, λu the undulator period, Ku= 93.4B[T]λu[m] the deflection parameter, B the magnetic field,|J J|=
J1(Y) −J0(Y) 2 , J the Bessel function and Y = K2u 4(1+K2
u/2). ρFELis the decisive parameter in terms of FEL amplification, such that the
gain length Lg, saturation length Lsatand saturation power Psatare dependent on it as follows: Lg= λu
4π√3ρFEL
, Lsat ≈20Łg, Psat≈ρFELIE, (8)
where E is the electron energy. ρFELis normally of the orders of 10−3, so an energy spread of 0.1% and below is required to enable the FEL amplification. This condition is not accomplished by typical LPA, since energy spreads have been measured to be∼10−2for MeV-GeV electron beams [21,22].
Furthermore, the bunch length is ultrashort of the orders of a few µm. This reduces the interaction length of the radiation field with the electron bunch.
2.1. Electron Beam Divergence Handling
Focusing magnets are used to handle and transport electron beams inside an accelerator. The focusing strength K is proportional to G/P, where G is the magnetic field gradient, P the beam
momentum so that a large gradient is needed for high energies. In the case of an LPA beam, a typical gradient of>100 T/m is required. The conventional focusing magnets are electro-magnet based quadrupoles providing an intermediate gradient and wide tunability. However, the device has to be compact in order to achieve a high gradient which poses a mechanical complexity. Superconducting magnets come in handy for such applications but they are much more expensive than the conventional electro-magnets due to the cryogenic cost (installation and operation) and the possibility of a quench as a result of heating originating from synchrotron radiation and image charges. Permanent magnet based quadrupoles eliminate the need for power supplies, cables and the large element of infrastructure for the water cooling system and can be reduced in size without losing the magnetic field strength making them suitable for compact applications such as LPA [23].
In view of an LPA application, an alternative focusing system, a plasma lens generating a field gradient of∼kT/m, can be used to focus the electron beam at an early stage by the use of the plasma itself. The plasma lens is based on the concept of a magnetically self-focusing electron beam of density neby ions from a residual gas or more generally by a plasma of density np[24]. Two regimes can be implemented, an over-dense regime (ne <<np) producing a focusing strength of K=2πrene/γ with rethe classical radius of the electron [25] and under-dense regime (ne >>np) with a strength of K=2πrenp/γ. Afterward, a passive plasma lens has been proposed and developed [26,27] and tested for an LPA experiment [28]. Another type, active plasma lens, has been proposed [29,30] and applied to ion beams [29,31] and to LPA applications as well [32–36].
2.2. Energy Spread Handling
Solutions to handle the FEL second requirement are now examined.
A magnetic chicane can be introduced in the line to stretch the electron beam and reduce the slice energy spread while inducing an energy-position correlation. A combined scaling law of the energy spread and bunch length [37,38] showed that the FEL gain length, in the case of bunches with relative energy spread on the order of the Pierce parameter and bunch lengths on the order of the cooperation length can be reduced. Furthermore, a set of quadrupoles can be placed between the chicane and the undulator, taking advantage of the correlation and allowing for chromatic optics [39]. Using this optics, the different energy slices are focused at different locations inside the undulator. With the right synchronization between the chromatic focusing and the wave slippage, one is able to ensure that the FEL wave always sees the maximum electron density and thus improving the FEL gain.
Another solution is the implementation of a Transverse Gradient Undulator (TGU) that can be used in the FEL based LPA line to compensate for the effects of beam energy spread. By canting the poles and magnets, one can generate a linear dependence of the vertical undulator field. The electron beam is dispersed in the horizontal axis so that each energy slice undergoes a different field magnitude and emit radiation at the same wavelength. This process enhances the FEL performance as shown in References [40,41].
3. LPA Based Undulator Radiation
The feasibility of achieving undulator radiation with an LPA source has been demonstrated in different laboratories.
3.1. Institute fur Optik und Quantenelektronik
A high-intensity Titanium:Sapphire laser of 5×1018W·cm−2andpulse duration of 80 fs is used to produce the relativistic electron beams [9]. The laser pulse is focused by an off-axis parabolic mirror into a supersonic helium gas jet where it accelerates electrons to several tens of MeV energy. The electrons propagate through an undulator, producing synchrotron radiation and into a magnetic electron spectrometer. Radiation is collected by a lens and analyzed in an optical spectrometer. The electron spectrum peaked at 64 MeV has a width of 3.4 MeV (full-width at half-maximum, FWHM), that is, rms energy spread of∼2.3% and contains a charge of 28 pC. The normalized emittance of the beam is
estimated to be εn≈1.3 π mm·mrad, derived from beam optics simulations and the beam divergence measured from the beam size. The undulator radiation is measured using a spectrometer. The spectra are peaked at 740 nm with a bandwidth of 55 nm and contain 284,000 photons (black). Another peak is observed at a wavelength of 900 nm (red) produced by a 58 MeV, 14 pC and 5% energy spread in another shot.
3.2. Max-Planck-Institut fur Quantenoptik
The line is customized to generate soft-X-ray undulator radiation with LPA electron beams [10]. Quadrupoles of bore radius 3 mm with an adjustable longitudinal position, achieving a gradient of 500 T/m, are installed after the electron source. The laser pulse is focused on a gas cell, where the electron beam is generated and then focused by two quadrupoles into the undulator. Diagnostic equipment, composed of an electron and photon spectrometer, are placed at the end of the line. An electron beam centered around the energy 210 MeV is measured using an electron spectrometer resulting in undulator radiation peaked at 18 nm (first harmonic) and 9 nm (second harmonic) using a monochromator with first diffraction order and a CCD camera.
3.3. Laboratoire d’Optique Appliquée
At Laboratoire d’Optique Appliquée, the line is designed for the generation of UV undulator radiation with laser-plasma-accelerated electron beams [11]. A Titanium:Sapphire laser delivering a linearly polarized pulse at 800 nm with more than 1 J energy, about 30 fs duration is focused on a gas jet made of Helium leading to an electron density of 5×1018cm−3. The generated relativistic electrons pass through a triplet of permanent magnet quadrupoles placed 15 cm from the source providing 15.4 T/m,−25 T/m and 15 T/m gradients, followed by a 0.6 m long undulator of period 18.2 mm and a deflection parameter of 1. The photon beam transverse shape radiation is measured on the CCD camera, which images a position corresponding to 60 cm after the end of the undulator and for electron energy of 120 MeV energy.
3.4. SUPA, Department of Physics, University of Strathclyde
An Advanced Laser-Plasma High-energy Accelerators towards X-rays (ALPHA-X) accelerator beam line has been commissioned [12]. A Titanium:Sapphire laser pulse centered at a wavelength of 800 nm with full-width at half-maximum duration of 36 fs and peak intensity of 2×1018W·cm−2is focused to a 20 µm waist at the leading edge of a 2 mm diameter Helium gas jet to form a relativistic self-guided plasma channel. The electron beams produced are initially collimated using a triplet of miniature permanent magnet quadrupoles of fixed gradients of 500 T/m. A triplet of electromagnetic quadrupoles then focuses the beam through the undulator with gradient∼2.4 T/m. Undulator output radiation is detected using a vacuum scanning monochromator and a CCD camera. The energy distribution measured has mean central energy of 104 MeV, with a 5% relative energy spread and contains a mean charge of 1.1±0.8 pC. The mean spectral bandwidth of the radiation is 69±11 nm corresponding to a relative bandwidth of 32±7%, decreasing to as low as 16%.
Table1summarizes some of the undulator radiation characteristics observed so far using an LPA source. The measured radiation bandwidth is still quite wide with rather poor wavelength stability. Wavelength tunability with undulator gap adjustment has not been shown yet. The undulator radiation quality achieved so far does not yet reach what is currently achieved on storage ring accelerator-based light sources.
Table 1.Laser and undulator characteristics used for the experiment, alongside the radiation quality produced. I the laser intensity, λLthe laser wavelength, E energy of the produced electron, λuthe undulator period, Nuundulator number of periods, Kuthe deflection parameter, λ the undulator radiation wavelength,∆λ/λ the relative bandwidth, B the radiation brilliance.
LPA System Undulator Radiation
Parameter I λL E λu Nu Ku λ ∆λ/λ B
Unit W·cm−2 nm MeV mm nm % ph/s/mm2/mrad2/0.1%bw
[9] 5×1018 740 65 20 50 0.6 740 7.4 6.5×1016 [10] - - 210 5 60 0.55 18 30 1.3×1017 [11] - 800 120 18 30 1 230-440 18 -[12] 2×1018 800 105 - 100 0.38 160-220 16 1×1018
3.5. COXINEL Experiment
The COXINEL transport line [42,44], as shown in Figure1, starts with the LPA system driven by a Titanium:Sapphire laser at Laboratoire d’Optique Appliquée, which delivers 30 fs (FWHM) pulses of 1.5 J energy at a central wavelength of 800 nm with a repetition rate of 1 Hz, power of 30 TW and energy of 1.5 J. The laser beam is focused by an off-axis parabola into a gas mixture composed of 99% He and 1% N2.
Figure 1. COXINEL beam line starting with the laser hutch (dark grey), gas jet (blue), a triplet of quadrupoles (grey), four dipoles (red), another set of quadrupoles (blue), undulator (purple) and a dipole dump (red).
The first magnetic element is a triplet of tunable high gradient permanent magnet-based quadrupoles (QUAPEVA) [23,45,46], placed 5 cm from the electron source. The triplet strongly focuses the LPA electron beam and permits to handle the large divergence at an early stage of the transport and mitigate the emittance growth. The electron beam is then sent through a chicane, where the beam is longitudinally stretched and sorted in energy to reduce the slice energy spread. The presence of a variable width slit in the middle of the chicane enables to select an energy range of interest [47–49]. A second set of quadrupoles placed after the chicane ensures that the transverse beam size is minimized at the undulator center. The undulator is a cryo-ready one operating at room temperature [50–52]. Table2presents the magnetic elements characteristics of the line. The QUAPEVAs achieve a maximum gradient of ∼180 T/m and provide tunability of ∼90 T/m. The chicane is composed of four electro-magnet dipoles. The electro-magnet based quadrupoles generate a maximum gradient of 20 T/m. The undulator is 2 m long and of period 18.16 mm with an adjustable magnetic gap providing a field variation. Transfer line components and LPA laser are aligned within ±100 µm on the reference axis using a laser tracker.
Table 2. COXINEL magnets relevant parameters. The three values for PMQs are for each PMQ of the triplet in the beam propagation order.
Unit Value
Permanent magnet quadrupoles
Magnetic length mm 40.7; 44.7; 26 Minimum gradient T/m 98;−100; 90 Maximum gradient T/m 181;−184; 165 Bore radius mm 4 Chicane dipoles Magnetic length mm 208.33 Integrated field T·mm 130 Maximum R56 mm 32 Maximum field T 0.53
Electro magnet quadrupoles
Magnetic length mm 213.3 Maximum gradient T/m 20
Bore radius mm 12
Steerers
Maximum integrated field G.m 38
Undulator
Period mm 18.16 Number of periods - 107
Minimum gap mm 4.5 Maximum field T 1.2
The electron beam has been successively controlled and transported down to the undulator. Thanks to the QUAPEVAs, beam pointing alignment compensation was established that enabled to correct the electron beam dispersion and transport it to the undulator [43]. An electron monochromator is added in the middle of the chicane enabling to select a smaller range of energies. This enables us to map the photon transverse shape using a CCD camera [43]. In addition, new electron beam optics has been adopted afterward, that enabled to reduce the energy spread of the electron beam arriving at the undulator more efficiently. This enabled us to reach a minimum undulator radiation bandwidth of 2% [53].
3.6. LUX at CFEL
Undulator radiation has also been reported [54] using a Titanium:Sapphire laser of 200 TW power to generate electrons at energies 600 MeV. The undulator is of a period of 5 mm and a Kuvalue of 0.3, generating radiation at a wavelength of nm.
4. Electron Beam Characteristics in the COXINEL Line 4.1. Transport
The COXINEL line was designed to enable wide tuning and manipulation of the electron beam. Thanks to the tunable high gradient QUAPEVAs, different beam optics can be adopted. Electron beam transport is tuned with BETA code [55] up to the second order, with home-made multiparticle tracking code for high order non-linear effects and collective effects like coherent synchrotron radiation [56]. Hard-edge models are used for the magnets and apertures of the vacuum chamber along the beam line are included. A linear optics from source to image [39] is implemented. This optics ensures a minimum beam size (waist) for the on-momentum particles (energy deviation δ = 0) at the focusing point (undulator center). By neglecting the coupling effect and limiting to the horizontal plane and chromatic terms, the transfer matrix from source to image can be expanded up to the second order as [57]:
x x0 ! = " R11 R12 R21 R22 ! +δ R116 R126 R216 R226 ! # x0 x00 ! , (9)
where the matrix Rij6stands for the chromatic second order perturbation. The COXINEL line ensures minimum a chromatic effect induced by the energy spread such that the term R226 is very small. Also, the electron beam generated by an LPA starts as a point source, so some of the terms can be neglected. And by considering a round Gaussian beam and approximating that R22 = 1/R11 [58], the rms associated momenta transfers at the center of the undulator can be expressed as:
σx2=R211σx02 +R2126σx002σγ2 σx02= R12 11 σx002 σxx0 =R126σx002σγ/R11 , (10)
Assuming a linear chicane decompression, the bunch length σland slice energy spread σγ-sliceare
expressed as: σl= q σl02 +R256σγ2 σγ-slice= q σl0 σl02+R256σγ2 σγ , (11)
where R56is the chicane strength, σl0the bunch length before the chicane. By calculating the bunch length and slice energy spread, one can now determine the slice emittance εsliceand slice beam size
σx-sliceat the center of the undulator can be expressed as: σx-slice = q R2 11σx02 +R2126σx002σγ2-slice ε2slice =ε2x0+R 2 126 R2 11 σx004σγ2-slice , (12)
4.2. Baseline Reference Case
At the start of COXINEL project, the baseline reference parameters that were examined at the source are presented in Table3, where the electron beam is considered to be a round Gaussian beam. Our aim at COXINEL is to achieve FEL amplification at 200 nm. The line is optimized in such a way that R11= 10 and R56= 0.4 mm. Inserting these values in Equations (11) and (12), one gets the beam parameters at the center of the undulator as shown in Table3.
Table 3.Baseline reference case parameters at the generation point in the gas jet and at the undulator center for R56= 0.4 mm, R11= 10 and R126=−4.4.
Parameters Symbol Source Undulator Unit
Total Slice
Energy E 200 200 200 MeV Normalized emittance εN 1 2 1.13 πmm·mrad
Effective emittance εe f f 2.6 5 2.8 nm Divergence (rms) σx,z0 1 0.1 0.1 mrad
Beam size (rms) σx,z 2.6 50 30 µm Bunch length (rms) σl 1 4.3 - µm Energy spread (rms) σγ-slice 1 1 0.24 %
Total charge Q 34 34 - pC Current Ib 4.3 1 1 kA
4.3. Electron Beam Brightness
To qualify an electron beam for an FEL application, an important parameter, brightness, that combines emittance, current and energy spread, is examined. The electron beam brightness can be
defined in the 6D phase space B6Das the total bunch charge Q divided by the normalized emittance in the three planes:
B6D= Q
εnxεnzεns
= I
εnxεnzσγ
(13) where εns= σsσγscales as the product of bunch length and relative energy spread. At the generation
source, the electron beam brightness is:
B6D=4.3×105A/mm2/mrad2 (14) and at the center of the undulator:
(
B6D(Total) =0.25×105A/mm2/mrad2
B6D(Slice) =3.3×105A/mm2/mrad2 (15) Comparing the electron beam brightness generated with an LPA with the one using a conventional linac by taking typical values (Ipeak = 500 A, εn = 1 mm·mrad, σγ = 0.01%), it is found to be
5×106A/mm2/mrad2, which is one order of magnitude higher due to the ultra-low energy spread. As mentioned in the transport line description, an electron monochromator is placed in the middle of the chicane. This helps reduce the energy spread, decrease the emittance and increase the brightness at the center of the undulator [18,59].
5. Undulator Radiation Characteristics
As the electron wiggles inside the undulator, radiation is emitted at each period and adds contructively at the resonance wavelength λ and its harmonics:
λ= λu 2nγ2 h 1+ K 2 u 2 +γ 2 θ2 i (16) with n the harmonic number and θ the observation angle.
5.1. Homogeneous Broadening
An electron orbitting an undulator with Nuperiods produces a wavetrain with equal number of oscillations. The electric field E of the light wave is written as:
E(t) =
(
E0exp(iωlt) if−T/2<t<T/2
0 Otherwise . (17)
The time duration of the wave train is T = Nuλ/c, with c the speed of light. Due to its finite
length, this wave train is not monochromatic but spans over a range of frequencies. This range can be determined by applying the Fourier transformation on the electric field:
E(ω) = √1 2π Z ∞ −∞E(t)e −iωtdt E(ω) = √E0 2π Z T/2 −T/2e i∆ωtdt with ∆ω=ω l−ω. Thus: E(ω) = √2E0 2π sin∆ωT/2 ∆ω .
The spectral intensity (I(ω)) is proportional to|E(ω)|2: I(ω)∝ sin x x 2 , (18) with x=∆ωT/2= (ωl−ω)Nuλ 2c =π Nu ωl−ω ωl
The undulator homogeneous bandwidth is thus expressed as: ∆λ λ hom = ∆ω ω = 1 Nu. (19)
For the COXINEL undulator with 107 number of periods, the first harmonic natural line width is 0.93%.
5.2. Inhomogeneous Broadening
A real electron beam has a finite transverse emittance and a range in energy, which broadens the radiation bandwidth. The energy spread σγwidens the line symmetrically. By deriving Equation (16)
with θ = 0: dλ= − λ 2γ2(1+K 2 u/2)( 2dγ γ ). Thus h∆λ λ i σγ =2dγ γ =2σγ. (20)
For an energy spread of 0.2% rms, the contribution on the bandwidth is∼0.94% close to the natural linewidth of the 100 period undulator case.
The divergence σx,z0 causes a red shift of the resonant wavelength and widens the bandwidth asymmetrically. λ= λu 2γ2(1+K 2 u/2) + λu 2 θ 2.
The deviation of the radiation wavelength with respect to the on-axis (θ = 0):
λ−λres=∆λ=λγ2θ2/(1+K2u/2). Therefore h∆λ λ i σx,z0 = γ 2σ02 x,z 1+K2 u/2 . (21)
A 0.1 mrad rms divergence contribution on the bandwidth is∼0.1% for an energy of 200 MeV and Kuof 2.
The total bandwidth can be calculated using the different contributions and applying an approximation that the divergence only contributes to the red side of the spectrum. Taking this into account, one can use the following quadratic sum approximation to determine the undulator radiation bandwidth [60]: h∆λ λ i = 1 2 v u u t ∆λ λ 2 σγ + ∆λ λ 2 hom + v u u t 1 4 ∆λ λ 2 σγ +1 4 ∆λ λ 2 hom + ∆λ λ 2 σx,z0 . (22)
Using Equation(22), the undulator radiation bandwidth is calculated using the total electron beam and slice parameters at the center of the undulator (see Table3):
(∆λ
λ (Total) =4.8%
∆λ
λ (Slice) =1.5%
. (23)
5.3. Photon Beam Flux and Brilliance
The photon flux ˙N at the first harmonic generated by an electron beam orbitting an undulator can be expressed as [61]: ˙ N=1.43×1014NuIK 2 u|J J|2 1+K2 u/2 . (24)
The flux calculated in the case of COXINEL is 1.3×1019ph/s/0.1% for a Kuvalue of 2. The flux is also simulated, for the total beam (blue) and slice beam (red) cases using an SRWcode [62] as shown in Figure2. The flux is peaked at the resonant wavelength of 176 nm. The difference between the analytical value and the simulated one is due to the small aperture of the observation window. If one uses a larger aperture, the flux attains a value of 1.5×1019ph/s/0.1% bw close to the calculated one. In addition, the relative bandwidth for the total beam and slice beam are found to be 4.9% and 1.4%, respectively, which are in good agreement with the calculated ones (see Equation (23)), implying that the approximation is quite valid.
Figure 2.SRW simulations of the spectral flux using the beam parameters of Table3for the total beam (blue) and slice beam (red). Window aperture of 1 mm x 1 mm placed at a distance 10 m from the center of the undulator. Ku= 2.
The brilliance B refers to the number of photons with the same wavelength that are directed and concentrated on a spot per unit of time. B is expressed as the photon flux divided by the photon emittance:
B= N˙ 4π2Σ2 x,zΣ02x,z∆λλ , (25) where Σx,z= q σx,z2 +σn2 Σ0 x,z= q σx,z02 +σn02, (26) with σn and σn0 are the photon beam natural size and divergence, respectively and are expressed as [63–65]: σn= √ Nuλuλ 4π σn0 = q λ Nuλu. (27)
The brilliance is calculated for the total electron beam and slice: (
B(Total) =1.7×1022ph/s/mm2/mrad2/0.1%bw
B(Slice) =7.5×1022ph/s/mm2/mrad2/0.1%bw. (28) The brilliance is also computed using SRW, where it is found to be 1.4 × 1022 ph/s/mm2/mrad2/0.1%bw for the total beam case and 7.6×1022 ph/s/mm2/mrad2/0.1%bw for the slice one. However, during the COXINEL experiment, the electron beam exhibited quite different qualities [66] and the brilliance is found to be of the orders of 1017ph/s/mm2/mrad2/0.1%bw [53], 3 orders of magnitude lower than the calculated one.
6. FEL Evaluation
In this section, the Ming Xi equations [67], that allow for a quick evaluation of an FEL performance, are presented. The study is for SASE amplification where the lasing is achieved in a single pass of a high current, high brightness electron beam through a long undulator. Starting with the ideal case (1D model: electron beam has a uniform transverse spatial distribution with zero emittance and energy spread) as presented in Equation (8):
L1D =
λ
4π√3ρFEL
. (29)
It can be shown that the FEL gain length can be expressed by a universal scaling function: L1D Lg =F(ηd, ηe, ηγ) = 1 1+η, (30) where ηd= λL1D 4πσ2 x , ηe= 4πεnL1D γβλ , ηγ = 4πσγL1D λu (31) and η=a1ηda2 +a3ηa4e +a5ηγa6+a7η a8 e η a9 γ +a10η a11 d η a12 γ +a13η a14 d η a15 e +a16η a17 d η a18 e η a19 γ , (32) with a1= 0.45 a2= 0.57 a3= 0.55 a4= 1.6 a5= 3 a6= 2 a7= 0.35 a8= 2.9 a9= 2.4 a10= 51 a11= 0.95 a12= 3 a13= 5.4 a14= 0.7 a15= 1.9 a16= 1140 a17= 2.2 a18= 2.9 a19= 3.2
The scaling parameters ηd, ηe, ηγ measure the deviation of the beam from the ideal case,
taking into account the gain reduction caused by diffraction, emittance and energy spread, respectively. The saturation power obtained from simulation is given by:
Psat =1.6ρFEL L1D
Lg
IE. (33)
After the calculation of Lgand Psat, the saturation length is determined by: Lsat=Lgln 9Psat Pn , (34) where Pn =cρ2FEL E λ,
where c is the speed of light. The power achieved after a certain undulator length can thus be determined using the following equation:
P= 1
9Pne
s/Lg. (35)
The calculated beam parameters presented in Table3are used to examine the FEL performance. Figure3shows the FEL power calculated as the chicane strength is varied for different magnification factors. The optimum case is for 0.2 mm chicane strength and 10 magnification factor, where the gain length is 0.11 m generating a power of 70 MW at 172 nm. The variation of the chicane strength provides an easy knob for FEL adjustment.
Figure 3.Free Electron Laser (FEL) power emitted after 2 m long undulator section as the magnification R11and chicane strength R56vary.
Table4presents the input values (R11, R56), the calculated beam parameters at the center of the undulator using Equation (12) and the FEL performance. The slice beam size and divergence highly depend on R11whereas the slice energy spread depends only on R56. The PCOXcorresponds to the power that can be observed at COXINEL after the 2 m long undulator, where it reaches a maximum value of 70 MW for a magnification factor R11= 10 and a chicane strength R56= 0.2 mm.
Table 4.FEL performance as the magnification of the beam (source to undulator center) and chicane strength are varied. Lgthe FEL gain length, Lsatthe FEL saturation length, Psatthe saturation power.
Input Beam Parameters FEL Perfomance
R11 R126 R56 σL σγ σx σx0 Ib Lg PCOX Lsat Psat
mm µm % µm µrad kA m MW m MW 5 −9.1 0.4 4.3 0.24 25.6 200 1 0.14 3 2.8 978 10 −4.5 0.4 4.3 0.24 28.2 100 1 0.12 17 2.5 1350 15 −3 0.4 4.3 0.24 39.7 66.7 1 0.14 1 3.1 1188 20 −2.3 0.4 4.3 0.24 52.3 50 1 0.17 0 3.7 1011 30 −1.5 0.4 4.3 0.24 78.1 33.3 1 0.23 0 5 737 10 0 0 1.6 1 26 100 2.8 0.17 0.2 3.5 1198 10 −1.1 0.1 1.9 0.71 27.2 100 2.3 0.13 8 2.7 1938 10 −2.3 0.2 2.5 0.45 27.9 100 1.7 0.11 70 2.4 2136 10 −9.1 0.8 8.2 0.12 28.3 100 0.5 0.15 0.5 3 583 10 −11.4 1 10.1 0.1 28.3 100 0.4 0.16 0.1 3.3 427 7. Conclusions
The problems and the context of LPA based FEL have been reported. The state-of-art of LPA based undulator radiation is presented, where the radiation does not yet exhibit the same quality as those
achieved with conventional accelerators. FEL is still very challenging to achieve, using such a source, due to the large divergence and energy spread at the generation point. However, with a line designed to manipulate the electron beam phase space, such as COXINEL, FEL amplification is quite possible.
Author Contributions: Validation, A.G., O.M. and M.-E.C.; Formal analysis, A.G., D.O., S.C., M.L. and A.L.; Writing original draft preparation, A.G.; Writing—review and editing, A.G.; Supervision, M.-E.C.; Project administration, M.-E.C. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.
Funding: European Research Council for the Advanced Grants COXINEL (340015, PI: M.-E. Couprie), the EuPRAXIA design study (653782) and the Fondation de la Cooperation Scientifique (QUAPEVA-2012-058T), the Agence Nationale de la Recherche projet 239 Blanc DYNACO 2010-042301, and Ministry of Higher Education and Research.
Conflicts of Interest:The authors declare no conflict of interest.
References
1. Elder, F.; Gurewitsch, A.; Langmuir, R.; Pollock, H. Radiation from electrons in a synchrotron. Phys. Rev.
1947, 71, 829.
2. Madey, J.M. Stimulated emission of bremsstrahlung in a periodic magnetic field. J. Appl. Phys. 1971, 42, 1906–1913.
3. Colson, W. Theory of a free electron laser. Phys. Lett. A 1976, 59, 187–190.
4. Maine, P.; Strickland, D.; Bado, P.; Pessot, M.; Mourou, G. Generation of ultrahigh peak power pulses by chirped pulse amplification. IEEE J. Quantum Electron. 1988, 24, 398–403.
5. Tajima, T.; Dawson, J.M. Laser electron accelerator. Phys. Rev. Lett. 1979, 43, 267.
6. Malka, V.; Fritzler, S.; Lefebvre, E.; Aleonard, M.M.; Burgy, F.; Chambaret, J.P.; Chemin, J.F.; Krushelnick, K.; Malka, G.; Mangles, S.P.D.; et al. Electron Acceleration by a Wake Field Forced by an Intense Ultrashort Laser Pulse. Science 2002, 298, 1596–1600. doi:10.1126/science.1076782.
7. Esarey, E.; Schroeder, C.B.; Leemans, W.P. Physics of laser-driven plasma-based electron accelerators. Rev. Mod. Phys. 2009, 81, 1229–1285. doi:10.1103/RevModPhys.81.1229.
8. Malka, V. Laser plasma accelerators. Phys. Plasmas 2012, 19, 055501. doi:10.1063/1.3695389.
9. Schlenvoigt, H.P.; Haupt, K.; Debus, A.; Budde, F.; Jäckel, O.; Pfotenhauer, S.; Schwoerer, H.; Rohwer, E.; Gallacher, J.; Brunetti, E.; et al. A compact synchrotron radiation source driven by a laser-plasma wakefield accelerator. Nat. Phys. 2008, 4, 130.
10. Fuchs, M.; Weingartner, R.; Popp, A.; Major, Z.; Becker, S.; Osterhoff, J.; Cortrie, I.; Zeitler, B.; Hörlein, R.; Tsakiris, G.D.; et al. Laser-driven soft-X-ray undulator source. Nat. Phys. 2009, 5, 826.
11. Lambert, G.; Corde, S.; Phuoc, K.T.; Malka, V.; Ismail, A.B.; Benveniste, E.; Specka, A.; Labat, M.; Loulergue, A.; Briquez, F.; et al. Progress on the generation of undulator radiation in the UV from a plasma-based electron beam. In Proceedings of the 34th International Free-Electron Laser Conference, Nara, Japan, 26–31 August 2012.
12. Anania, M.P.; Brunetti, E.; Wiggins, S.; Grant, D.W.; Welsh, G.H.; Issac, R.; Cipiccia, S.; Shanks, R.; Manahan, G.; Aniculaesei, C.; et al. An ultrashort pulse ultra-violet radiation undulator source driven by a laser plasma wakefield accelerator. Appl. Phys. Lett. 2014, 104, 264102.
13. Grüner, F.; Becker, S.; Schramm, U.; Eichner, T.; Fuchs, M.; Weingartner, R.; Habs, D.; Meyer-ter Vehn, J.; Geissler, M.; Ferrario, M.; et al. Design considerations for table-top, laser-based VUV and X-ray free electron lasers. Appl. Phys. B 2007, 86, 431–435.
14. Pellegrini, C. Free electron lasers: Development and applications. Part. Accel. 1990, 33, 159–170.
15. Floettmann, K.; Paramonov, V.V. Beam dynamics in transverse deflecting rf structures. Phys. Rev. Spec. Top.-Accel. Beams 2014, 17, 024001.
16. Floettmann, K. Some basic features of the beam emittance. Phys. Rev. Spec. Top.-Accel. Beams 2003, 6, 034202. 17. Antici, P.; Bacci, A.; Benedetti, C.; Chiadroni, E.; Ferrario, M.; Rossi, A.; Lancia, L.; Migliorati, M.; Mostacci, A.; Palumbo, L.; et al. Laser-driven electron beamlines generated by coupling laser-plasma sources with conventional transport systems. J. Appl. Phys. 2012, 112, 044902.
18. Oumbarek Espinos, D.; Ghaith, A.; André, T.; Kitégi, C.; Sebdaoui, M.; Loulergue, A.; Marteau, F.; Blache, F.; Valléau, M.; Labat, M.; et al. Skew Quadrupole Effect of Laser Plasma Electron Beam Transport. Appl. Sci.
19. Migliorati, M.; Bacci, A.; Benedetti, C.; Chiadroni, E.; Ferrario, M.; Mostacci, A.; Palumbo, L.; Rossi, A.; Serafini, L.; Antici, P. Intrinsic normalized emittance growth in laser-driven electron accelerators. Phys. Rev. Spec. Top.-Accel. Beams 2013, 16, 011302.
20. Huang, Z.; Kim, K.J. Three-dimensional analysis of harmonic generation in high-gain free-electron lasers. Phys. Rev. E 2000, 62, 7295.
21. Leemans, W.; Volfbeyn, P.; Guo, K.; Chattopadhyay, S.; Schroeder, C.; Shadwick, B.; Lee, P.; Wurtele, J.; Esarey, E. Laser-driven plasma-based accelerators: Wakefield excitation, channel guiding, and laser triggered particle injection. Phys. Plasmas 1998, 5, 1615–1623.
22. Lin, C.; van Tilborg, J.; Nakamura, K.; Gonsalves, A.J.; Matlis, N.H.; Sokollik, T.; Shiraishi, S.; Osterhoff, J.; Benedetti, C.; Schroeder, C.B.; et al. Long-range persistence of femtosecond modulations on laser-plasma-accelerated electron beams. Phys. Rev. Lett. 2012, 108, 094801.
23. Ghaith, A.; Oumbarek, D.; Kitégi, C.; Valléau, M.; Marteau, F.; Couprie, M.E. Permanent Magnet-Based Quadrupoles for Plasma Acceleration Sources. Instruments 2019, 3, 27.
24. Bennett, W.H. Magnetically self-focussing streams. Phys. Rev. 1934, 45, 890.
25. Rosenzweig, J.; Breizman, B.; Katsouleas, T.; Su, J. Acceleration and focusing of electrons in two-dimensional nonlinear plasma wake fields. Phys. Rev. A 1991, 44, R6189.
26. Chen, P. Grand disruption: A possible final focusing mechanism for linear colliders. Part. Accel. 1986, 20, 171–182.
27. Lehe, R.; Thaury, C.; Guillaume, E.; Lifschitz, A.; Malka, V. Laser-plasma lens for laser-wakefield accelerators. Phys. Rev. Spec. Top.-Accel. Beams 2014, 17, 121301.
28. Thaury, C.; Guillaume, E.; Döpp, A.; Lehe, R.; Lifschitz, A.; Phuoc, K.T.; Gautier, J.; Goddet, J.P.; Tafzi, A.; Flacco, A.; et al. Demonstration of relativistic electron beam focusing by a laser-plasma lens. Nat. Commun.
2015, 6, 6860.
29. Panofsky, W.K.H.; Baker, W.R. A focusing device for the external 350-MeV proton beam of the 184-inch cyclotron at Berkeley. Rev. Sci. Instrum. 1950, 21, 445–447.
30. Röckemann, J.H.; Schaper, L.; Barber, S.; Bobrova, N.; Boyle, G.; Bulanov, S.; Delbos, N.; Floettmann, K.; Kube, G.; Lauth, W.; et al. Direct measurement of focusing fields in active plasma lenses. Phys. Rev. Accel. Beams 2018, 21, 122801.
31. Tauschwitz, A.; Yu, S.; Eylon, S.; Bangerter, R.; Leemans, W.; Peters, C.; Rasmussen, J.; Reginato, L.; Barnard, J.; Sharp, W. Plasma lens focusing and plasma channel transport for heavy ion fusion. Fusion Eng. Des. 1996, 32, 493–502.
32. Nakanii, N.; Hosokai, T.; Iwasa, K.; Masuda, S.; Zhidkov, A.; Pathak, N.; Nakahara, H.; Mizuta, Y.; Takeguchi, N.; Kodama, R. Transient magnetized plasma as an optical element for high power laser pulses. Phys. Rev. Spec. Top.-Accel. Beams 2015, 18, 021303.
33. Van Tilborg, J.; Steinke, S.; Geddes, C.; Matlis, N.; Shaw, B.; Gonsalves, A.; Huijts, J.; Nakamura, K.; Daniels, J.; Schroeder, C.; et al. Active plasma lensing for relativistic laser-plasma-accelerated electron beams. Phys. Rev. Lett. 2015, 115, 184802.
34. Van Tilborg, J.; Barber, S.; Tsai, H.E.; Swanson, K.; Steinke, S.; Geddes, C.; Gonsalves, A.; Schroeder, C.; Esarey, E.; Bulanov, S.; et al. Nonuniform discharge currents in active plasma lenses. Phys. Rev. Accel. Beams
2017, 20, 032803.
35. Marocchino, A.; Anania, M.; Bellaveglia, M.; Biagioni, A.; Bini, S.; Bisesto, F.; Brentegani, E.; Chiadroni, E.; Cianchi, A.; Croia, M.; et al. Experimental characterization of the effects induced by passive plasma lens on high brightness electron bunches. Appl. Phys. Lett. 2017, 111, 184101.
36. Pompili, R.; Anania, M.; Bellaveglia, M.; Biagioni, A.; Bini, S.; Bisesto, F.; Brentegani, E.; Cardelli, F.; Castorina, G.; Chiadroni, E.; et al. Focusing of High-Brightness Electron Beams with Active-Plasma Lenses. Phys. Rev. Lett. 2018, 121, 174801.
37. Seggebrock, T.; Maier, A.; Dornmair, I.; Grüner, F. Bunch decompression for laser-plasma driven free-electron laser demonstration schemes. Phys. Rev. Spec. Top.-Accel. Beams 2013, 16, 070703.
38. Maier, A.; Meseck, A.; Reiche, S.; Schroeder, C.; Seggebrock, T.; Gruener, F. Demonstration scheme for a laser-plasma-driven free-electron laser. Phys. Rev. X 2012, 2, 031019.
39. Loulergue, A.; Labat, M.; Evain, C.; Benabderrahmane, C.; Malka, V.; Couprie, M. Beam manipulation for compact laser wakefield accelerator based free-electron lasers. New J. Phys. 2015, 17, 023028.
40. Liu, T.; Zhang, T.; Wang, D.; Huang, Z. Compact beam transport system for free-electron lasers driven by a laser plasma accelerator. Phys. Rev. Accel. Beams 2017, 20, 020701.
41. Huang, Z.; Ding, Y.; Schroeder, C.B. Compact X-ray free-electron laser from a laser-plasma accelerator using a transverse-gradient undulator. Phys. Rev. Lett. 2012, 109, 204801.
42. Couprie, M.E.; Labat, M.; Evain, C.; Marteau, F.; Briquez, F.; Khojoyan, M.; Benabderrahmane, C.; Chapuis, L.; Hubert, N.; Bourassin-Bouchet, C.; et al. An application of laser plasma acceleration: towards a free-electron laser amplification. Plasma Phys. Control. Fusion 2016, 58, 034020.
43. André, T.; Szwaj, C.; Valléau, M.; Briquez, F.; Loulergue, A.; Hubert, N.; El Ajjouri, M.; Evain, C.; Goddet, J.P.; Rommeluère, P.; et al. Electron transport on Coxinel beam line. In Proceedings of the 8th International Particle Accelerator Conference (IPAC 2017), Copenhagen, Denmark, 14–19 May 2017.
44. Couprie, M.E.; Andre, T.; Andriyash, I. COXINEL: Towards free electron laser amplification to qualify laser plasma acceleration. Reza Kenkyu 2017, 45, 94–98.
45. Marteau, F.; Ghaith, A.; N’Gotta, P.; Benabderrahmane, C.; Valléau, M.; Kitegi, C.; Loulergue, A.; Vétéran, J.; Sebdaoui, M.; André, T.; et al. Variable high gradient permanent magnet quadrupole (QUAPEVA). Appl. Phys. Lett. 2017, 111, 253503.
46. Ghaith, A.; Kitegi, C.; André, T.; Valléau, M.; Marteau, F.; Vétéran, J.; Blache, F.; Benabderrahmane, C.; Cosson, O.; Forest, F.; et al. Tunable high gradient quadrupoles for a laser plasma acceleration based FEL. Nucl. Instrum. Methods Phys. Res. Sec. A Accel. Spectrom. Detect. Assoc. Equip. 2018, 909, 290–293.
47. Emma, P.; Bane, K.; Cornacchia, M.; Huang, Z.; Schlarb, H.; Stupakov, G.; Walz, D. Femtosecond and Subfemtosecond X-Ray Pulses from a Self-Amplified Spontaneous-Emission–Based Free-Electron Laser. Phys. Rev. Lett. 2004, 92, 074801. doi:10.1103/PhysRevLett.92.074801.
48. Scisciò, M.; Migliorati, M.; Palumbo, L.; Antici, P. Design and optimization of a compact laser-driven proton beamline. Sci. Rep. 2018, 8, 6299.
49. Zhu, X.; Broemmelsiek, D.R.; Shin, Y.M. Theoretical and numerical analyses of a slit-masked chicane for modulated bunch generation. J. Instrum. 2015, 10, P10042.
50. Benabderrahmane, C.; Valléau, M.; Ghaith, A.; Berteaud, P.; Chapuis, L.; Marteau, F.; Briquez, F.; Marcouillé, O.; Marlats, J.L.; Tavakoli, K.; et al. Development and operation of a Pr2Fe14B based cryogenic permanent magnet undulator for a high spatial resolution x-ray beam line. Phys. Rev. Accel. Beams 2017, 20, 033201.
51. Valléau, M.; Briquez, F.; Brunelle, P.; Kitegi, C.; Mary, A.; Rommeluère, P.; Béchu, N.; Somogyi, A.; Tilmont, M.; Idam, J.; et al. Construction and optimization of cryogenic undulators at SOLEIL. In Proceedings of the 60th ICFA Advanced Beam Dynamics Workshop on Future Light Sources (FLS2018), Shanghai, China, 5–9 March 2018.
52. Ghaith, A.; Somogyi, A.; Berteaud, P.; Couprie, M.E.; Valléau, M.; Sebdaoui, M.; Béchu, N.; Blache, F.; Briquez, F.; Tilmont, M.; et al. Progress of Pr2Fe14B based hybrid cryogenic undulators at SOLEIL. In Proceedings of the 8th International Particle Accelerator Conference (IPAC 2017), Copenhagen, Denmark, 14–19 May 2017.
53. Ghaith, A. Tunable High Spatio-Spectral Purity Undulator Radiation from a Transported Laser Plasma Accelerated Electron Beam. Sci. Rep. 2019, 9, 1–12.
54. Delbos, N.; Werle, C.; Dornmair, I.; Eichner, T.; Hübner, L.; Jalas, S.; Jolly, S.; Kirchen, M.; Leroux, V.; Messner, P.; et al. Lux—A laser–plasma driven undulator beamline. Nucl. Instrum. Methods Phys. Res. Sec. A Accel. Spectrom. Detect. Assoc. Equip. 2018, 909, 318–322.
55. Payet, J. Beta code. CEA, SACLAY. Available online:http://irfu.cea.fr/Sacm/logiciels/index6.php(accessed on 1 February 2017).
56. Khojoyan, M.; Briquez, F.; Labat, M.; Loulergue, A.; Marcouillé, O.; Marteau, F.; Sharma, G.; Couprie, M. Transport studies of LPA electron beam towards the FEL amplification at COXINEL. Nucl. Instrum. Methods Phys. Res. Sec. A Accel. Spectrom. Detect. Assoc. Equip. 2016, 829, 260–264.
57. Brown, K.L. First-and Second-Order Matrix Theory for the Design of Beam Transport Systems and Charged Particle Spectrometers; Technical Report; Stanford Linear Accelerator Center: Menlo Park, CA, USA, 1971.
58. Thomas, A. Transport et Manipulation D’éLectrons Produits par Interaction Laser Plasma sur la Ligne COXINEL. Ph.D. Thesis, Paris Saclay, Essonne, France, 2018.
59. Oumbarek, D. COXINEL transport of laser plasma accelerated electrons. accepted.
61. Clarke, J.A. The Science and Technology of Undulators and Wigglers; Oxford University Press: Oxford, UK, 2004; Volume 4,
62. Chubar, O.; Elleaume, P.; Kuznetsov, S.; Snigirev, A.A. Physical optics computer code optimized for synchrotron radiation. Opt. Des. Anal. Softw. II Int. Soc. Opt. Photon. 2002, 4769, 145–152.
63. Coisson, R.; Walker, R. Phase space distribution of brilliance of undulator sources. Insertion Devices for Synchrotron Sources. Int. Soc. Opt. Photonics 1986, 582, 24–31.
64. Kim, K.-J. Brightness and Coherence of Radiation from Undulators and High-Gain Free Electron Lasers. Nucl. Instrum. Methods Phys. Res. Sec. A Accel. Spectrom. Detect. Assoc. Equip. 1987, 261, 44–53.
65. Walker, R.P. Insertion Devices: Undulators and Wigglers. In Proceedings of the CERN Accelerator School: Course on Synchrotron Radiation and Free-electron Lasers, Grenoble, France, 22–27 April 1996; pp. 129–190. 66. André, T.; Andriyash, I.; Loulergue, A.; Labat, M.; Roussel, E.; Ghaith, A.; Khojoyan, M.; Thaury, C.; Valléau, M.; Briquez, F.; et al. Control of laser plasma accelerated electrons for light sources. Nat. Commun.
2018, 9, 1334.
67. Xie, M. Design optimization for an X-ray free electron laser driven by SLAC linac. In Proceedings of the Particle Accelerator Conference, Dallas, TX, USA, 1–5 May 1995; Volume 1, pp. 183–185.
c
2020 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
